Afghanistan: The Forever War

The July 30 ruling by a federal judge that the U.S. may continue holding as
a prisoner of war an inmate of Guantanamo who was captured in Afghanistan in
2002, was a reminder that America is still at war in that country. The prisoner
claimed that since the U.S. formally ended its combat role in Afghanistan in
2014, he had a right to be released. But according to Judge Royce C. Lambeth,
the war in Afghanistan is not yet over. He wrote in his decision, The
government may not always say what it means or means what it says. One
of the defendants lawyers said the judges ruling endorsed the
idea of a limitless forever war under which the government can continue fighting.
But fighting for what? The murderous attack on the World Trade Towers in September
2001 was masterminded, financed, and carried out by a group of Saudis. Yet without
attempting to understand the motivation behind the suicidal attack, or to identify
the policies that provoked it, George W. Bush declared a war on terror
and ordered the invasion of Afghanistan.

He did so with the full support of Congress. Only one member, Rep. Barbara
Lee (D-CA), voted against the resolution authorizing military action. In a column
for the San Francisco Chronicle of September 23, 2001, Lee urged that the perpetrators
be brought to justice, but added, A rush to launch precipitous military
counterattacks runs too great a risk that more innocent men, women, and children
will be killed. I could not vote for a resolution that could lead to such an
outcome.

Her apprehension was justified. As of last year, 91,000 Afghans had been killed,
including 26,000 civilians. More than 2,000 Americans were dead, and many more
handicapped for life. Whatever their deaths had accomplished, it was surely
not victory.

The initial invasion by U.S. and NATO troops, accompanied by massive bombing
attacks, drove the Taliban government out of Afghanistan and into Pakistan.
But as the Americans began turning much of the fighting over to the Afghan army,
the Taliban were able to fight their way back and regain control of a large
part of the country, often with the support of the local population.

In late July, Taliban forces succeeded in capturing three northern provinces
as hundreds of Afghan soldiers either retreated or surrendered. A provincial
council official accused the army of drowning in their own negligence.
Despite intensive training by the Americans, the Afghan army is largely dysfunctional.
Illiteracy and desertion are major problems, but the army and police are mainly
crippled by the corruption that pervades every level of Afghan society. Soldiers
complain that their officers sell their bullets to the Taliban, then take the
money and leave their men stranded. One veteran explained to a reporter, Our
commanders all buy their positions so they have to make money to pay for them.
The Taliban do not do this with their commanders.

The corruption that starts with officers selling their troops ammunition
grows exponentially at higher levels of government, to the degree that Transparency
International cites Afghanistan as one the three most corrupt countries in the
world. Two years ago Matthew Rosenberg reported in the New York Times that For
more than a decade, wads of American dollars packed into suitcases, backpacks,
and on occasion plastic shopping bags, have been dropped off every month or
so at the offices of Afghanistans president  courtesy of the Central
Intelligence Agency. We called it ghost money,
an Afghan official said.

Instead of providing services to the Afghan people, or even buying influence,
the money has damaged the fabric of Afghan society and prevented economic growth.
A country that despite being poor was once almost self-sufficient in food and
other essentials is now almost entirely dependent on foreign funding. With an
economy that for years was focused on serving foreign troops, there has been
little investment in agriculture or industry, and as a result, poverty is endemic.
At least a million Afghan children suffer from acute malnutrition, and more
than three quarters of all Afghans lack access to clean water.

Analysts say the Taliban is winning not because of its strength but because
of the governments weakness. Too many Afghans dont trust either
the government, or the underpaid police and soldiers sent to protect them. Too
often the latter extort money from them or abuse them in other ways. The New
York Times quoted an anonymous diplomat as saying, Afghans are not looking
for many things, mostly justice and security. He added, There is
justice under the Taliban.

There has also been a softening in the Talibans stand on some key issues.
In recent interviews they said they no longer seek to monopolize power,
and they now consider education and access to work as basic rights of women
as well as men. Local commanders in Kunduz are allowing schools to stay open
and are distributing pens and notebooks even to girls schools. Last June
Taliban officials held a reportedly cordial meeting with female Afghan peace
activists, one of whom is a member of the Afghan legislature.

The Talibans current leader, Akhtar Mohammed Mansoor, appointed as his
deputies two members of the hard-line Haqqani network, which the U.S. has labeled
terrorist, but he nevertheless has been willing to engage in peace talks with
the Afghan government without preconditions.

So why is America still at war in that beleaguered country? According to President
Obama, its not. That is, not exactly. Although 11,000 U.S. troops remain
on active duty in Afghanistan, Americas combat role officially ended on
December 28, 2015, when President Obama speaking from Hawaii, announced that
The longest war in American history is coming to a responsible end.

Operation Enduring Freedom was officially over. But Operation Resolute Support
immediately took its place. They change the name of the mission but the
mission doesnt change, said the wife of a sergeant serving in Afghanistan.
In November 2014, a month before declaring the war over, Obama had signed a
secret order expanding the militarys mission in Afghanistan in 2015 to
include fighting Taliban forces that threatened American troops or the Afghan
government, and authorizing airstrikes and the resumption of nighttime house
raids that in the past have angered the Afghans.

This past June and July, six months after Obama declared an end to the U.S.
combat mission,U.S. warplanes and drones carried out twice as many attacks on
the Taliban and other militants as in previous months. Although most of the
strikes were aimed at Taliban fighters, targets have expanded to include members
of the Islamic State, or ISIS, which is active in the eastern part of the country.

Given the fact that ISIS constitutes a threat to both the Taliban and the Afghan
government, logic suggests that now is the time for Afghanistan to push for
peace with the Taliban and for the U.S. to actively encourage their efforts.
Any peace agreement between the Afghan government and the Taliban is bound to
be less than perfect, but surely an imperfect peace is better than an endless
war that serves no purpose.

Rachelle Marshall is a former editor and writer and a member of Mill Valley
Seniors for Peace, a Jewish Voice for Peace, and Women’s International League
for Peace and Freedom.Reprinted with permission from Foreign
Policy In Focus.